|
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldn’t see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trump’s town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, “Should a president’s faith matter?” “I guess it depends on what that faith is,” Carson replied. “If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter.” “Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution?” Todd pressed. “No, I do not,” Carson quickly replied. “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not.” - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
|
GOPers hate 'Merica
|
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:35:14 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 9/21/15 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldn’t see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trump’s town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, “Should a president’s faith matter?” “I guess it depends on what that faith is,” Carson replied. “If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter.” “Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution?” Todd pressed. “No, I do not,” Carson quickly replied. “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not.” - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. Actually, I am not defending religion...I am defending Article VI. I don't give a damn whether the POTUS is "religious" or not, just so he or she doesn't use "religion" to decide or propose policy. Do you really think anyone who was a muslim (or any other fundamentalist religion) wouldn't be affected at all by their faith? Muslims may be the least tolerant of all of the faiths. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/21/15 1:11 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:35:14 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/21/15 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldn’t see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trump’s town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, “Should a president’s faith matter?” “I guess it depends on what that faith is,” Carson replied. “If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter.” “Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution?” Todd pressed. “No, I do not,” Carson quickly replied. “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not.” - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. Actually, I am not defending religion...I am defending Article VI. I don't give a damn whether the POTUS is "religious" or not, just so he or she doesn't use "religion" to decide or propose policy. Do you really think anyone who was a muslim (or any other fundamentalist religion) wouldn't be affected at all by their faith? Muslims may be the least tolerant of all of the faiths. My comment was in defense of Article VI. Ben Carson is an overly religious, intolerant crank, a genuine paranoid personality, probably because of his religious beliefs. Is Carson, because of his religious beliefs, more dangerous as a potential POTUS than the two lying, nativist demagogues, Trump and Fiorina, who comprise the GOP's "Big Three" at the moment? U.S. Congressman Keith Ellison, a Muslim, is more rational and sane and less hate-filled than Carson, Trump, or Fiorinia. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:19:13 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 9/21/15 1:11 PM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:35:14 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 9/21/15 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldnt see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trumps town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, Should a presidents faith matter? I guess it depends on what that faith is, Carson replied. If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution? Todd pressed. No, I do not, Carson quickly replied. I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not. - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. Actually, I am not defending religion...I am defending Article VI. I don't give a damn whether the POTUS is "religious" or not, just so he or she doesn't use "religion" to decide or propose policy. Do you really think anyone who was a muslim (or any other fundamentalist religion) wouldn't be affected at all by their faith? Muslims may be the least tolerant of all of the faiths. My comment was in defense of Article VI. Ben Carson is an overly religious, intolerant crank, a genuine paranoid personality, probably because of his religious beliefs. Is Carson, because of his religious beliefs, more dangerous as a potential POTUS than the two lying, nativist demagogues, Trump and Fiorina, who comprise the GOP's "Big Three" at the moment? U.S. Congressman Keith Ellison, a Muslim, is more rational and sane and less hate-filled than Carson, Trump, or Fiorinia. Your comment was stupid. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:05:28 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 9/21/15 12:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 9/21/2015 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldnt see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trumps town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, Should a presidents faith matter? I guess it depends on what that faith is, Carson replied. If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution? Todd pressed. No, I do not, Carson quickly replied. I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not. - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. There is no conflict between what Carson said and the Constitution. Carson was presenting his personal views, not an interpretation of the Constitution or law. I submit that a lot of people probably agree with him right now, which is probably why he said what he said. If a Muslim was refused nomination papers based on his/her religion, that would be illegal. But, that's not what the doc said. It's really really humorous watching you dancing around on the head of a pin as you justify your swing to the crazy right. When someone who wants to be POTUS expresses his views on a Constitutional issue, it's just a teeny bit more than a personal view, eh? Read the definition of 'advocate', dummy. Carson used that word, not the word 'prohibit'. Get your head out of your ass for a change. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:34:43 -0400, John H.
wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:05:28 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 9/21/15 12:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 9/21/2015 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldnt see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trumps town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, Should a presidents faith matter? I guess it depends on what that faith is, Carson replied. If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution? Todd pressed. No, I do not, Carson quickly replied. I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not. - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. There is no conflict between what Carson said and the Constitution. Carson was presenting his personal views, not an interpretation of the Constitution or law. I submit that a lot of people probably agree with him right now, which is probably why he said what he said. If a Muslim was refused nomination papers based on his/her religion, that would be illegal. But, that's not what the doc said. It's really really humorous watching you dancing around on the head of a pin as you justify your swing to the crazy right. When someone who wants to be POTUS expresses his views on a Constitutional issue, it's just a teeny bit more than a personal view, eh? Read the definition of 'advocate', dummy. Carson used that word, not the word 'prohibit'. Get your head out of your ass for a change. === Be careful what you ask for. :-) |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 15:40:09 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:34:43 -0400, John H. wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:05:28 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 9/21/15 12:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 9/21/2015 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldnt see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trumps town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, Should a presidents faith matter? I guess it depends on what that faith is, Carson replied. If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution? Todd pressed. No, I do not, Carson quickly replied. I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not. - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. There is no conflict between what Carson said and the Constitution. Carson was presenting his personal views, not an interpretation of the Constitution or law. I submit that a lot of people probably agree with him right now, which is probably why he said what he said. If a Muslim was refused nomination papers based on his/her religion, that would be illegal. But, that's not what the doc said. It's really really humorous watching you dancing around on the head of a pin as you justify your swing to the crazy right. When someone who wants to be POTUS expresses his views on a Constitutional issue, it's just a teeny bit more than a personal view, eh? Read the definition of 'advocate', dummy. Carson used that word, not the word 'prohibit'. Get your head out of your ass for a change. === Be careful what you ask for. :-) He's no better than most of the liberal media dummies, that's for sure. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 15:41:38 -0400, John H.
wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 15:40:09 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:34:43 -0400, John H. wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:05:28 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 9/21/15 12:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 9/21/2015 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldnt see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trumps town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, Should a presidents faith matter? I guess it depends on what that faith is, Carson replied. If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution? Todd pressed. No, I do not, Carson quickly replied. I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not. - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. There is no conflict between what Carson said and the Constitution. Carson was presenting his personal views, not an interpretation of the Constitution or law. I submit that a lot of people probably agree with him right now, which is probably why he said what he said. If a Muslim was refused nomination papers based on his/her religion, that would be illegal. But, that's not what the doc said. It's really really humorous watching you dancing around on the head of a pin as you justify your swing to the crazy right. When someone who wants to be POTUS expresses his views on a Constitutional issue, it's just a teeny bit more than a personal view, eh? Read the definition of 'advocate', dummy. Carson used that word, not the word 'prohibit'. Get your head out of your ass for a change. === Be careful what you ask for. :-) He's no better than most of the liberal media dummies, that's for sure. === Harry's always eager to solve the evils of the world with someone else's tax money. His tax money? What money would that be? He should be in the slam for fraudulent conveyance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraudulent_conveyance |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 16:20:33 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 15:41:38 -0400, John H. wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 15:40:09 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:34:43 -0400, John H. wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:05:28 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 9/21/15 12:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 9/21/2015 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldnt see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trumps town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, Should a presidents faith matter? I guess it depends on what that faith is, Carson replied. If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution? Todd pressed. No, I do not, Carson quickly replied. I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not. - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. There is no conflict between what Carson said and the Constitution. Carson was presenting his personal views, not an interpretation of the Constitution or law. I submit that a lot of people probably agree with him right now, which is probably why he said what he said. If a Muslim was refused nomination papers based on his/her religion, that would be illegal. But, that's not what the doc said. It's really really humorous watching you dancing around on the head of a pin as you justify your swing to the crazy right. When someone who wants to be POTUS expresses his views on a Constitutional issue, it's just a teeny bit more than a personal view, eh? Read the definition of 'advocate', dummy. Carson used that word, not the word 'prohibit'. Get your head out of your ass for a change. === Be careful what you ask for. :-) He's no better than most of the liberal media dummies, that's for sure. === Harry's always eager to solve the evils of the world with someone else's tax money. His tax money? What money would that be? He should be in the slam for fraudulent conveyance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraudulent_conveyance I watched a bit of CNN. I Carson was misquoted about a dozen times. It's funny how absolutely dishonest the liberals can be. Of course, Krause is a fine example. Look at the dead soldier story for a fine example. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/21/2015 3:40 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:34:43 -0400, John H. wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:05:28 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 9/21/15 12:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 9/21/2015 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldnt see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trumps town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, Should a presidents faith matter? I guess it depends on what that faith is, Carson replied. If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution? Todd pressed. No, I do not, Carson quickly replied. I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not. - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. There is no conflict between what Carson said and the Constitution. Carson was presenting his personal views, not an interpretation of the Constitution or law. I submit that a lot of people probably agree with him right now, which is probably why he said what he said. If a Muslim was refused nomination papers based on his/her religion, that would be illegal. But, that's not what the doc said. It's really really humorous watching you dancing around on the head of a pin as you justify your swing to the crazy right. When someone who wants to be POTUS expresses his views on a Constitutional issue, it's just a teeny bit more than a personal view, eh? Read the definition of 'advocate', dummy. Carson used that word, not the word 'prohibit'. Get your head out of your ass for a change. === Be careful what you ask for. :-) Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/21/2015 12:11 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:35:14 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/21/15 11:41 AM, wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:56:51 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: Appearing on Meet the Press, retired neurosurgeon and GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson said that the faith of a potential president of the U.S. matters and that he couldn’t see having a Muslim president. Referring to GOP front runner Donald Trump’s town hall confrontation with an anti-Muslim bigot, host Chuck Todd asked Carson, “Should a president’s faith matter?” “I guess it depends on what that faith is,” Carson replied. “If it is inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter.” “Do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution?” Todd pressed. “No, I do not,” Carson quickly replied. “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not.” - - - "...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." - Art. VI, Para. 3, Constitution of the United States of America. Harry defending religion in the white house. Lord you can take me now. I have seen it all. Actually, I am not defending religion...I am defending Article VI. I don't give a damn whether the POTUS is "religious" or not, just so he or she doesn't use "religion" to decide or propose policy. Do you really think anyone who was a muslim (or any other fundamentalist religion) wouldn't be affected at all by their faith? Muslims may be the least tolerant of all of the faiths. You say that like they would cut your head off if you don't convert to their faith! Mikek |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 16:42:34 -0400, John H.
wrote: I watched a bit of CNN. I Carson was misquoted about a dozen times. It's funny how absolutely dishonest the liberals can be. Of course, Krause is a fine example. Look at the dead soldier story for a fine example. -- === I like Dr Ben. He's no politician but that's a big part of his appeal I think. Unfortunately it's also going to limit his campaign. All of the Republican candidates seem to have this uncanny ability to needlessly offend broad segments of the electorate. If Biden decides to run and gets the (D) nomination, I'd be inclined to vote for him. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
FlatulenceJim stinks out the joint...
"Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move." Well, the Floriduh UnFunny Man dumps more of his toilet humour. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/21/15 6:39 PM, True North wrote:
FlatulenceJim stinks out the joint... "Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move." Well, the Floriduh UnFunny Man dumps more of his toilet humour. Be on the lookout...he's just the sort of guy who would drive his RV up to where you live and dump its holding tank in a fresh water reservoir... |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/21/2015 10:09 PM, True North wrote:
Keyser Sze - hide quoted text - On 9/21/15 6:39 PM, True North wrote: FlatulenceJim stinks out the joint... "Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move." Well, the Floriduh UnFunny Man dumps more of his toilet humour. "Be on the lookout...he's just the sort of guy who would drive his RV up to where you live and dump its holding tank in a fresh water reservoir... " No problem...we'll bag him and ship him up go Dickson as a Halloween treat. I'm sure the two of them could make sweet polka music all night long. Still talking gibberish, A? Get back to us when you sober up. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
Keyser Sze
- hide quoted text - On 9/21/15 6:39 PM, True North wrote: FlatulenceJim stinks out the joint... "Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move." Well, the Floriduh UnFunny Man dumps more of his toilet humour. "Be on the lookout...he's just the sort of guy who would drive his RV up to where you live and dump its holding tank in a fresh water reservoir... " No problem...we'll bag him and ship him up go Dickson as a Halloween treat. I'm sure the two of them could make sweet polka music all night long. |
Quote:
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Ed-...t_nbr=bs7bumjc President Barack Obama has agreed to endorse a presidential campaign by Vice President Joe Biden if he is allowed to pick Biden's running mate, |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 19:11:29 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 9/21/15 6:39 PM, True North wrote: FlatulenceJim stinks out the joint... "Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move." Well, the Floriduh UnFunny Man dumps more of his toilet humour. Be on the lookout...he's just the sort of guy who would drive his RV up to where you live and dump its holding tank in a fresh water reservoir... Recreational dumping. Probably as legal as dumping in the harbor. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
The JohnnyMop inserts his head in the toilet...
" Recreational dumping. Probably as legal as dumping in the harbor." Not for your kind of crap, JohnnyMop. I doubt our sewage plant could handle it. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 18:14:43 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 16:42:34 -0400, John H. wrote: I watched a bit of CNN. I Carson was misquoted about a dozen times. It's funny how absolutely dishonest the liberals can be. Of course, Krause is a fine example. Look at the dead soldier story for a fine example. -- === I like Dr Ben. He's no politician but that's a big part of his appeal I think. Unfortunately it's also going to limit his campaign. All of the Republican candidates seem to have this uncanny ability to needlessly offend broad segments of the electorate. If Biden decides to run and gets the (D) nomination, I'd be inclined to vote for him. Nope. Except for Trump, I'd vote for any of the top four Republicans before Biden. I like Carson. It's a shame the majority of the electorate will hear and believe, like Krause, the misquotes and meaning of what Carson said. We just have to do what we can to overcome stupidity. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 04:54:43 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:
The JohnnyMop inserts his head in the toilet... " Recreational dumping. Probably as legal as dumping in the harbor." Not for your kind of crap, JohnnyMop. I doubt our sewage plant could handle it. The water in your harbor goes through a sewage plant? You are so full of useful information. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/22/2015 7:27 AM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 19:11:29 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 9/21/15 6:39 PM, True North wrote: FlatulenceJim stinks out the joint... "Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move." Well, the Floriduh UnFunny Man dumps more of his toilet humour. Be on the lookout...he's just the sort of guy who would drive his RV up to where you live and dump its holding tank in a fresh water reservoir... Recreational dumping. Probably as legal as dumping in the harbor. -- Ban idiots, not guns! Remember the suitcase toilet that Harry used to take along when his wife went boating with him. I wonder if he made her clean it out after she used it? |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/22/2015 9:05 AM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 18:14:43 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 16:42:34 -0400, John H. wrote: I watched a bit of CNN. I Carson was misquoted about a dozen times. It's funny how absolutely dishonest the liberals can be. Of course, Krause is a fine example. Look at the dead soldier story for a fine example. -- === I like Dr Ben. He's no politician but that's a big part of his appeal I think. Unfortunately it's also going to limit his campaign. All of the Republican candidates seem to have this uncanny ability to needlessly offend broad segments of the electorate. If Biden decides to run and gets the (D) nomination, I'd be inclined to vote for him. Nope. Except for Trump, I'd vote for any of the top four Republicans before Biden. I like Carson. It's a shame the majority of the electorate will hear and believe, like Krause, the misquotes and meaning of what Carson said. We just have to do what we can to overcome stupidity. -- Ban idiots, not guns! Krause flunked parsing at Kansas Klown Collitch. That might be why he allows the DNC and various union thugs to do his thinking for him. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 09:05:00 -0400, John H.
wrote: I like Dr Ben. He's no politician but that's a big part of his appeal I think. Unfortunately it's also going to limit his campaign. All of the Republican candidates seem to have this uncanny ability to needlessly offend broad segments of the electorate. If Biden decides to run and gets the (D) nomination, I'd be inclined to vote for him. Nope. Except for Trump, I'd vote for any of the top four Republicans before Biden. I like Carson. It's a shame the majority of the electorate will hear and believe, like Krause, the misquotes and meaning of what Carson said. We just have to do what we can to overcome stupidity. === Old saying: You can't fix stupid. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:41:57 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 9/22/15 1:09 PM, wrote: In addition to other very liberal objectives Patrick proposed and pushed for some extremely restrictive gun laws in a state that already has very restrictive laws regarding firearms. There were several that he proposed or endorsed ranging from a limit of one gun purchase per month, a long waiting period and the imposition of a large tax on ammunition ... all in an attempt to discourage private gun ownership. Fortunately, even in liberal Massachusetts, his proposals were soundly rejected. Good to know. It is really not unusual for a northeastern democrat tho. What else? Right, because nothing is more important than...guns. Except maybe abortion and neither are a reason to select a presidential candidate. What is (s)he going to do about Putin, Assad, Netanyahu and the rest of the bomb throwers in the world? How will they stimulate the economy and what are they doing about the debt? How are they going to deal with the fact that we are rapidly running out of water? Those are the issues that are going to doom my grand children if they are not dealt with. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/22/15 3:52 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:41:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/22/15 1:09 PM, wrote: In addition to other very liberal objectives Patrick proposed and pushed for some extremely restrictive gun laws in a state that already has very restrictive laws regarding firearms. There were several that he proposed or endorsed ranging from a limit of one gun purchase per month, a long waiting period and the imposition of a large tax on ammunition ... all in an attempt to discourage private gun ownership. Fortunately, even in liberal Massachusetts, his proposals were soundly rejected. Good to know. It is really not unusual for a northeastern democrat tho. What else? Right, because nothing is more important than...guns. Except maybe abortion and neither are a reason to select a presidential candidate. What is (s)he going to do about Putin, Assad, Netanyahu and the rest of the bomb throwers in the world? How will they stimulate the economy and what are they doing about the debt? How are they going to deal with the fact that we are rapidly running out of water? Those are the issues that are going to doom my grand children if they are not dealt with. Perhaps the Libertarian candidate of your choice will have the answers to the pressing issues you raise. Oh, wait. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:56:30 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 9/22/15 3:52 PM, wrote: On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:41:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/22/15 1:09 PM, wrote: In addition to other very liberal objectives Patrick proposed and pushed for some extremely restrictive gun laws in a state that already has very restrictive laws regarding firearms. There were several that he proposed or endorsed ranging from a limit of one gun purchase per month, a long waiting period and the imposition of a large tax on ammunition ... all in an attempt to discourage private gun ownership. Fortunately, even in liberal Massachusetts, his proposals were soundly rejected. Good to know. It is really not unusual for a northeastern democrat tho. What else? Right, because nothing is more important than...guns. Except maybe abortion and neither are a reason to select a presidential candidate. What is (s)he going to do about Putin, Assad, Netanyahu and the rest of the bomb throwers in the world? How will they stimulate the economy and what are they doing about the debt? How are they going to deal with the fact that we are rapidly running out of water? Those are the issues that are going to doom my grand children if they are not dealt with. Perhaps the Libertarian candidate of your choice will have the answers to the pressing issues you raise. Oh, wait. I am not sure there is a libertarian candidate yet but they would definitely be better on the money issues. The foreign policy is more likely to be better. I am not sure there is an answer to the water problem but a free market solution is likely to be better than regulation. If the water is too expensive to sprinkle on the lawn, people will stop watering their lawns. The real problem is going to be agriculture and those "blooming deserts:" in California are likely to go away. It is not quite as bad in the mid west but they are still depleting the Ogallala aquifer and that is fossil water, just like the deep water in California that they have pretty much used up. We are not getting that water back. One statement in last month's Scientific American is definitely true. "Water flows toward money". When Jerry Brown implored his rich democrats in Southern California to conserve water, the actual usage WENT UP. The answer is to make them pay through the nose for it. Water rates should go up exponentially as usage goes up. Basic drinking and bathing water should be fairly cheap but when you start getting over a couple thousand gallons a month, the rate should start going nuts. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 09:34:21 -0400, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 9/22/2015 7:27 AM, John H. wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 19:11:29 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 9/21/15 6:39 PM, True North wrote: FlatulenceJim stinks out the joint... "Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move." Well, the Floriduh UnFunny Man dumps more of his toilet humour. Be on the lookout...he's just the sort of guy who would drive his RV up to where you live and dump its holding tank in a fresh water reservoir... Recreational dumping. Probably as legal as dumping in the harbor. -- Ban idiots, not guns! Remember the suitcase toilet that Harry used to take along when his wife went boating with him. I wonder if he made her clean it out after she used it? Knowing Harry, he probably just emptied it in the bay...if his wife ever went with him in the first place. He'd be hard to take for more than a very few minutes on a small boat, unless she had headphones, of course. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:26:44 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 09:05:00 -0400, John H. wrote: I like Dr Ben. He's no politician but that's a big part of his appeal I think. Unfortunately it's also going to limit his campaign. All of the Republican candidates seem to have this uncanny ability to needlessly offend broad segments of the electorate. If Biden decides to run and gets the (D) nomination, I'd be inclined to vote for him. Nope. Except for Trump, I'd vote for any of the top four Republicans before Biden. I like Carson. It's a shame the majority of the electorate will hear and believe, like Krause, the misquotes and meaning of what Carson said. We just have to do what we can to overcome stupidity. === Old saying: You can't fix stupid. N.B. I didn't say 'fix'! -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/22/15 4:31 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:56:30 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/22/15 3:52 PM, wrote: On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:41:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/22/15 1:09 PM, wrote: In addition to other very liberal objectives Patrick proposed and pushed for some extremely restrictive gun laws in a state that already has very restrictive laws regarding firearms. There were several that he proposed or endorsed ranging from a limit of one gun purchase per month, a long waiting period and the imposition of a large tax on ammunition ... all in an attempt to discourage private gun ownership. Fortunately, even in liberal Massachusetts, his proposals were soundly rejected. Good to know. It is really not unusual for a northeastern democrat tho. What else? Right, because nothing is more important than...guns. Except maybe abortion and neither are a reason to select a presidential candidate. What is (s)he going to do about Putin, Assad, Netanyahu and the rest of the bomb throwers in the world? How will they stimulate the economy and what are they doing about the debt? How are they going to deal with the fact that we are rapidly running out of water? Those are the issues that are going to doom my grand children if they are not dealt with. Perhaps the Libertarian candidate of your choice will have the answers to the pressing issues you raise. Oh, wait. I am not sure there is a libertarian candidate yet but they would definitely be better on the money issues. The foreign policy is more likely to be better. Really? I don't see how, since they ain't gonna be elected. |
GOPers hate 'Merica
On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:06:08 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 9/22/15 4:31 PM, wrote: On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:56:30 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/22/15 3:52 PM, wrote: On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:41:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: On 9/22/15 1:09 PM, wrote: In addition to other very liberal objectives Patrick proposed and pushed for some extremely restrictive gun laws in a state that already has very restrictive laws regarding firearms. There were several that he proposed or endorsed ranging from a limit of one gun purchase per month, a long waiting period and the imposition of a large tax on ammunition ... all in an attempt to discourage private gun ownership. Fortunately, even in liberal Massachusetts, his proposals were soundly rejected. Good to know. It is really not unusual for a northeastern democrat tho. What else? Right, because nothing is more important than...guns. Except maybe abortion and neither are a reason to select a presidential candidate. What is (s)he going to do about Putin, Assad, Netanyahu and the rest of the bomb throwers in the world? How will they stimulate the economy and what are they doing about the debt? How are they going to deal with the fact that we are rapidly running out of water? Those are the issues that are going to doom my grand children if they are not dealt with. Perhaps the Libertarian candidate of your choice will have the answers to the pressing issues you raise. Oh, wait. I am not sure there is a libertarian candidate yet but they would definitely be better on the money issues. The foreign policy is more likely to be better. Really? I don't see how, since they ain't gonna be elected. Trump isn't going to be elected either but that doesn't stop you from talking about him. You are the one who brought up the libertarians. If it didn't matter, were you just trolling again? |
GOPers hate 'Merica
True North wrote:
Keyser Sze - hide quoted text - On 9/21/15 6:39 PM, True North wrote: FlatulenceJim stinks out the joint... "Donnie will be the first to feel the aftermath of that dangerous move." Well, the Floriduh UnFunny Man dumps more of his toilet humour. "Be on the lookout...he's just the sort of guy who would drive his RV up to where you live and dump its holding tank in a fresh water reservoir... " No problem...we'll bag him and ship him up go Dickson as a Halloween treat. I'm sure the two of them could make sweet polka music all night long. "ship him up go Dickson"??? You had to post that twice? |
GOPers hate 'Merica
I suppose I should be thankful it did.
|
GOPers hate 'Merica
On 9/27/2015 8:55 AM, Tim wrote:
I suppose I should be thankful it did. Is there some way you can teach Gookle to quote what you are responding to? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:27 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com